131–140 of 730 posts
There are independent agencies that will certify destruction of data. For example FTI Tech, Kroll, Epiq, HaystackID and others.
No such certificates have been presented.
Nothing less is trustworthy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The many controversies are not hard to find as the children to your comment will show. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/22/technology/grok-x-ai-elon...
They had a bug in their model that they fixed within days is evidence they are "untrustworthy"?
It was only deemed a bug when it became a liability - you can't simply rewrite history and expect it to go unnoticed.
This is not the right thing, this is the tactical thing. If you have an LLM with less than 1% of the share to begin with, you suffer from bad rep and you got caught uploading user data, one of the very few remaining tactical moves to try to climb out of it is this.
[flagged]
And for generating an absolutely gargantuan amount of CSAM and non-consensual sexualized images, but yeah, exfiltrating data too.
How tools are used are a reflection of the people who use them, and I definitely sympathise that tools should have guardrails to not enable this, or at least detect it.
But if a pedophile uses Whatsapp to groom a child; I don't go after Whatsapp for being a neutral service... I go after the pedophile.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about stopping the upload of all the data https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48877371 and running their data center with gas turbines without permission while they pollute the air https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48705717 you can’t expect people to praise your for making an n+1 harness open source. This seems more like, look we made something, now fix it for us
[flagged]
Most people don't restrict themselves to only discussing the technical aspects of a thing. A thing which is technologically novel (e.g. not this example) may nonetheless not be worth using, due to assorted risks.
I don't find it surprising that HN posters are helping their fellow hackers avoid getting victimized by predators. We just have that sort of nice community :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Chinese are surely less evil than Anthropic, OpenAI and/or Google, at this stage at least.
You’ve got to be kidding me. Last I checked, Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google haven’t systematically exterminated an entire culture of people.
Do you really think the US and US big tech in general have a leg to stand on in this regard?
This is not the right thing, this is the tactical thing. If you have an LLM with less than 1% of the share to begin with, you suffer from bad rep and you got caught uploading user data, one of the very few remaining tactical moves to try to climb out of it is this.
Another tactical move is to just stop. You're allowed to exit the AI business. Nobody's forcing you to keep throwing money into the furnace. Just be a rocket company. All of the xAI founders left. Your product's brand name is mud. Just stop doing that and build spaceships.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your choice is Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, or the Chinese. Who are the good actors within the space?
Rank ordered by reputation / caring about having a trustworthy corporate identity: [Google, Anthropic] in either order depending who you ask, OpenAI, most of the Chinese AI corporations, then Grok. This is unfortunate situation to find ourselves in when Grok was also recently at the top of the Pareto frontier for quality/price. Dunno if it still is, this all moves too fast, but it was for at least long enough for me…
It's a shame that they exfiled private data. The model is actually good (better than opus 4.8 imo) and the harness itself is butter smooth with the potential of being the best out there.